Monday, 29 November 2010

It's difficult to believe that the 'Amway' Lord Haw Haw, Mr.'IBOFB,' Steadson, is not blind drunk when he composes the unsolicited, reality-inverting bullshit which he regularly dumps your Blog. So far, his only explanation of why Robert FitzPatrick has not been charged with pejury for making what Mr. Steadson claims to have been a false declaration to the California courthearing the Pokorny RICO lawsuit against 'Amway' ( http://www.casewatch.org/civil/amway/fitzpatrick.pdf ) has been: that Robert FitzPatrick was not lying to the court and, therefore, not committing perjury, because he believed his false statement to be true.

As you know, perjury is the willful act of swearing a false oathor affirmation to tell the truth (whether spoken or in writing) concerning matters material to a judicial proceeding (i.e. a witness falsely promises to tell the truth about matters which effect the outcome of the case). Perjury is considered a serious offence as it can be used to usurp the power of the courts, resulting in miscarriages of justice. In the USA, the general perjury statute under Federal law defines perjury as a felony and provides for a prison sentence of up to five years. In the UK, a potential penalty for perjury is a prison sentence of up to 7 years. The rules for perjury also apply when a person has made a statement under penalty of perjury, even if the person has not been sworn or affirmed as a witness before an appropriate official. Statements of interpretation of simple fact are not perjury because people often make inaccurate statements unwittingly and not deliberately. Individuals may have honest, but mistaken, beliefs about certain simple facts, or their recollection may be inaccurate. Like most other crimes in the common law system, to be convicted of perjury one must have had the intention to commit the act, and to have actually committed the act, of lying in order to effect the outcome of a judicial proceeding. Subornation of perjury, or attempting to induce another person to perjure themselves, is itself a crime.

Mr. Steadson's simplistic interpretation of the law of perjury in respect of Robert FitzPatrick's declaration in the Pokorny RICO lawsuit is, therefore, a demonstrable lie; for Robert FitzPatrick is not just a simple witness whom Mr. Steadson has accused of unwittingly making an innaccurate statement of simple fact to a court. In reality, this expert witness gave a long and detailed explanation to a court of what qualifies him as a expert witness and of why 'Amway's' so-called 'Multilevel Marketing Business Opportunity' (which, during the previous 50+ years, has had no significant or sustainable source of revenue other than its own victims) is, in his expert opinion, fundamentally fraudulent. Given the intentional, extensive and detailed nature of his declaration, and the fact that he has delivered essentially the same declaration in more than a dozen State and federal prosecutions concerning so-called 'Multilevel Marketing' companies, it would be impossible for Robert Fitzpatrick to be simply mistaken.

Self-evidently, Mr. Steadson has, on behalf of the billionaire bosses of the 'Amway' mob, been trying to weasel his way out of possibly being sued for libel for making a false (albeit indirect) accusation of perjury against Robert FitzPatrick.

The 'Amway' Ministry of Truth continues to defraud the public all around the world by steadfastly pretending that the 'Amway' organization, and the (so-called) 'Multilevel Marketing Business Opportunity' which it has offered to the public for more than 50 years, enjoy full government approval all around the world.

In reality, government agencies all around the world have followed the corrupt lead of the de facto American kleptocracy, and simply refused to launch a rigorous criminal enquiry into the entire 'Multilevel Marketing' racket, let alone enforce basic criminal laws which were designed to protect the public by prohibiting all acts of fraud and corruption. In other words, by doing effectively nothing to challenge the authenticity of the pernicious 'MLM' fiction, government law enforcement agents have authorized fraud and corruption. Indeed, it was the Cardinal Richelieu who (in the 17th century) made the axiomatic observation that:

'by passing a law and then failing to enforce it, you authorize the very crime which you would seek to prohibit.'

Today (more than 30 years after the pernicious 'MLM' lie first arrived in the UK and millions UK citizens have bought into itfalsely believing it to enjoy full government approval), two UK government law enforcement agencies are still arguing about whose responsibility it is to investigate and prosecute 'Business Opportunity' fraud. Indeed, some of the face-saving statements recently made to me by low-level agents of the UK Serious Fraud Office and high-level agents of the Companies Investigation Branch of the UK Ministry for Business, could have come straight out of George Orwell's'Nineteen Eighty-Four.'

Personally, I have found it impossible to make direct contact with any legally-qualified agent of the UK SFO. These individuals hide behind an echelon of unqualified Orwellian officials whose job it is to field complaints and enquiries from whistle-blowers and concerned members of the public, and then systematically inform them that, 'in this instance, the SFO cannot take action.' As has previously been explained on this Blog, the UK SFO is a demonstrably-impotent organization which has cost UK tax payers more than £40 millions annually and which has comprised more than 300 qualified and unqualified agents allegedly charged withthe investigation and prosecution of complex, nationally, and internationally, based frauds and acts of corruption involving amounts in excess of £1 million. Somewhat surprisingly, the Director of the UK SFO has spent large quantities of UK tax-payers money broadcasting the embarrassing facts that fraud and corruption cost the UK economy at least $30000000000 annually (that's £30 billions or £30 thousands millions), but that, last year, the SFO prosecuted less than 20 cases and only managed to recover around £4 millions for victims. Consequently, it doesn't take a genius to work out that, by boasting that the annual SFO recovery-rate (by value) for the victims of fraud and corruption in the UK has been at least 7.5 thousand times less than their total annual loss-rate (by value), the head of the UK SFO might as well have sent out gilt-edged invitations for foreign-based racketeers to come to the UK, where their chances of being held to account by his impotent agency have been effectively zero.

I see that that your deluded young friend, Trivedi, has reappeared on your Blog. Evidently, the poor little lad still needs to believe that the kitsch comic-book dream-world of 'Amway' is real. He now seriously expects your free-thinking readers to accept (without question) his own unsubstantiated claims to be regularly retailing 'Amway's' (effectively unsaleable) wampum to the Indian public for a profit, and to be acquainted with at least one other individual (his own cousin) who is doing the same.

Perhaps we should remind Trivedi that, in the adult world of quantifiable reality, if he were to repeat the same reality-inverting fairy-tales in court of law as he has just posted on your Blog, then he would risk being charged with perjury. The recent claim made on your Blog by the unmasked, and unqualified, 'Amway' Lord Haw Haw , Mr. 'IBOFB' Steadson, that lying under oath is not perjury provided the liar believes that he/she is telling the truth, is itself a lie.

The unchallenged deposition of Robert FitzPatrick (which was made under penalty of perjury) to a Court in California http://www.casewatch.org/civil/amway/fitzpatrick.pdf, combined with the substantiated witness testimony of the plaintiffs in the same case, clearly demonstrates that 'Amway's' dwindling flock of Internet apologists cannot be telling the truth. Anyone with fully-functioning critical faculties can see that Robert FitzPatrick, far from being a deluded and isolated liar (as he has been falsely portrayed on your Blog by the 'Amway' Lord Haw Haw), is actually an internationally-respected author and business analyst who has served as a consultant and expert witness in more than a dozen State and federal court cases involving so-called 'Multilevel Marketing' companies.

Strangely, during 3 years of the Pokorny RICO lawsuit, attorneys acting for the billionaire bosses of the 'Amway'mob were unable to produce the audited accounts of the American equivalents of Trivedi, which might have proved that, contrary to Robert FitzPatrick's deposition and the substantiated witness testimony of the plaintiffs in the case, significant numbers of 'Amway' adherents (and their cousins) have always made regular profitable retail sales of 'Amway's (effectively unsaleable) wampum to the American public.

Self-evidently, the reason why the billionaire bosses of the'Amway' mob were recently obliged to agree to a settlement which will cost them $155 millions, was to avoid the unstoppable Pokorny RICO lawsuit from going to trial.

Saturday, 27 November 2010

The Supreme Court in deciding the Criminal Appeal No. 1044 of 2008 KURIACHAN CHACKO AND OTHERS Versus STATE OF KERALA, stated that prima facie, the courts were satisfied that but for the representation and the benefits sought to be given under the Scheme, the victims would not have acted on such representation. It was, therefore, a case of application of Section 415 IPC. The trial court as well as the High Court considered the facts of the case and held that there is an element of cheating inasmuch as a representation was made by the accused that every unit-holder will get double the amount invested by him; the representation was false, the maker of the representation was aware that the representation was not true and by such representation, he deceived the victim to believe the representation to be true and actuated him to act on such representation. The promoters induced the common public to part with money on the lure of doubling the amount. The advertisement clearly declared that a member would get double the amount when after his enrollment, two members were enrolled under him and thereafter. (Paras 47 and 39)

Prima facie case had been made out in absence of better explanation by the accused. The Kerala High Court also upheld the argument of prosecution that the Scheme was a "mathematical impossibility". The promoters of the scheme very well knew that it is certain that the Scheme was impracticable and unworkable making tall promises which the makers of the promises knew fully well that it could not work successfully. It could work for some time in that "Paul can be robbed to pay Peter" but ultimately when there is a large mass of Peters, they will be left in the lurch without any remedy as they would by then have been deceived and deprived of their money. If it is so. It could be said to be a case for application of Section 420 read with Section 34 IPC. of course, at this stage. (Paras 47 and 41)

Amway is exactly doing what is described as cheating in the above case. It is inducing the public that they would earn Rs. 62, 500 every month on enrollment of 102 persons under their downline under the 6-4-3 scheme. Here they not only merely offered to double the investment but also claimed that the members would get an infinite income of Rs. 62, 500 every month. That is why here also Section 420 under Indian Penal Code is applicable along with Section 34 (joint liability).

The Amway apologists may argue that there is compulsion to enroll members but the inducement is so attractive that the IBOs keep on chasing for new members to achieve 102 members downline. Apart from Section 2 (c) and 3 r/w 4,5,6 of Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Bannng) Act, 1978, Section 420 and Section 34 of IPC are also applicable.

Friday, 26 November 2010

Your free-thinking readers will be very pleased to learn that, two days ago (five years after he was indicted), one of the'Amway' mob's most-sanctimonious and sleazy US political stooges, former- Republican Congressman for a Texas constituency, Tom DeLay (b. 1948), was found guilty of money laundering and conspiracy to commit money laundering, by a Texas State jury. The evidence against him was overwhelming and he risks spending the rest of his life in jail, but he left the courtroom still grinning from ear to ear, steadfastly pretending to be the innocent little victim of an abuse of power.

As has become the fashion in the American kleptocracy, the appropriately named Mr. DeLay, will have simply instructed his attorneys to lodge an appeal against his criminal conviction.

In 2006, two of Mr. DeLay's aides conveniently pleaded guilty to corruption charges resulting from their association with Republican 'lobbyist,' Jack Abramoff. At that time, Mr. DeLay, who was rapidly becoming a major embarrassment to the billionaire bosses of the 'Amway' mob, decided to get out of politics. Theupstanding ChristianCongressman, and former 'Amway Business Owner,' himself narrowly escaped criminal charges after a six-year federal corruption investigation into Mr. Abramoff. This resulted in the 'lobbyist' being indicted, convicted and sentenced to 4 years in a federal prison for commiting fraud against native American Indian tribes and for bribing Republican politicians and their aides.

Personally, I think that this explanation in itself contains sufficient information for Indian police officers to take action. It certainly would be a good start for Indian prosecutors if they wanted to draw up an overwhelming criminal case against the flock of useful idiots who currently style themselves as the corporate officers of the (fake) 'Direct Selling' company known as 'Amway India Enterprises'.

Also, as far as I'm aware, in democratic countries (like India) with laws deriving from English Common Law, criminal fraud doesn't just comprise telling lies; the deliberate withholding of key-information in order to take financial advantage of an ill-informed person, is also considered to be a form of theft.

Obviously, the useful idiots at 'Amway India Enterprises' have never informed the Indian public that the persons who are actually in charge of their counterfeit company, are US-based thieves who, on at least two occasions in the past, have been forced to hand over many millions of dollars of their ill-gotten gains, in order to avoid being held fully-to account for their hidden crimes. Given access to this key-information, would any Indian citizen (in his/her right mind) want to sign a contract with 'Amway India Enterprises,' or with any other so-called 'MLM' company for that matter?

On a lighter note, I thought that your free-thinking readers might like to know that amongst the people to have contacted me regarding 'MLM' scams, is a self-confessed, reformed-cheat who was born into a family of travelling fairground operators. When the fair set up on racetracks, a few of the more-shady operators had another 'business' running small-time 'gambling' frauds; particularly the three-card trick. As a teenager, the colourful fellow who contacted me had been a schill (i.e. fake winner) in three-card trick gang which actually comprised about 10 people. For obvious reasons, he could smell a mile away that 'Amway' was a fraud. a couple of years ago, he told me about how he had been approached by a deeply-deluded 'Independent Business Owner' who was married to a member his family, and who tried to recruit him into the'Amway' scam by paying for him to attend a mysterious 'motivation meeting' where a 'Highly-Successful Business Associate' flaunted his alleged 'MLM wealth.'He said:

'When the big schill got to his feet and started sounding off about how much he was making whilst he slept and about how he'd paid cash for a star's mansion, I didn't know whether to laugh or cry, because I'd sort of been there and done that... the Amway crowd was a giant three-card trick... not even a sucker will not risk their cash with a rich stranger on the turn of a card, but when a certain type of sucker sees an ordinary young guy winning a pile of cash, he can't get his own cash out fast enough. Suckers are sheep - they follow the flock. Suckers want to believe fairground card games are for real and winners are for real, but winners are schills ... if any sucker complained two heavies were there to kick over the table ... whoever started 'Amway' was following an old fairground rule - You can shear a sheep lots of times, but you can only skin it once.'

Monday, 22 November 2010

Perhaps we should again remind you free-thinking readers that it was the billionaire bosses of the 'Amway' mob who tried to dodge investigation of their clandestine crimes in India, by filing a malicious High Court writ against the Indian police in which they steadfastly pretended that their corporate structure known as 'Amway India Enterprises' has been acting in full-compliance with Indian legislation and has the full-approval of the Indian government. However, when senior Indian Judges looked at 'Amway's' so-called 'Business Plan' (as proposed in literature produced for 'Amway India Enterprises') they immediately deduced that the company, and its gleaming external presentation of 'Hundreds of Thousands of Successful, and Ethical, Indian Amway Business Owners Selling Millions of Dollars Worth of World-Class Amway Products Annually,' has been nothing more than the camouflage for an illegal money circulation scheme (as defined by Indian law), designed to bedazzle vulnerable, and/or greedy, Indian citizens, in order to steal their money.

Unfortunately (although accurate), this well-informed, Indian legalistic opinion only begins to identify a much more serious, criminogenic phenomenon; for the pernicious 'Multilevel Marketing' mind-virus was designed to self-replicate and to prevent its victims from facing reality. It was first released on American minds in the 1950s. Since that time (despite several challenges), it has infiltrated traditonal American culture and been allowed to spread all over the globe.

Today, as a result of unprotected exposure to one of an ever-growing catalogue of apparently innocent 'MLM/Direct Selling' companies, almost anyone can begin to exhibit remarkably uniform symptoms. In everyday terms, it is as though they have fallen in love. Although this initial euphoria is often short-lived, a significant minority will subsequently undergo a nighmarish transformation and recklessly dissipate all their mental, and/or physical, and/or financial, resources to the benefit of hitherto unknown persons, whom they continue to trust and follow no matter what suffering this entails.

The worst 'MLM' victims can become totally-convinced that by handing over a regular cash payment to their group (in exchange for effectively unsaleable and over-priced wampum), and by recruiting others to do the same, they are building a secure Utopian existence for themselves, their families and their recruits.

In the adult world of quantifiable reality, nothing could be further from the truth.

Here is the important part of the Andhra Pradesh High Court judgement which held Amway India guilty of garnering easy and quick money. Amway apologists may claim that it is now collecting only Rs. 995 as entry fee. That does not absolve them from the crime. They are still making easy and quick money through minimum monthly PV of 50.

As pleaded by the petitioners themselves, out of Rs.4,400/- a substantial part, namely Rs.1,800/- is collected as subscription fee, license fee, business kit etc.To qualify for earning commission a member has to earn the minimum monthly PV of 50 which he will get by selling products worth Rs.2,000/-.Respondent No.6 in para-11(c) of his counter affidavit specifically pleaded that “Amway” (First petitioner) would automatically get a business of the quantum of Rs.1080/- crores (4,50,000 x 2,000 x 12(months) ) per annum which would yield an astronomical profit and it cannot but be stated as “easy/quick money” without any service to the distributors/members irrespective of whether they sell the products or not, though the company may conveniently refer it as “turnover by sale of products”.Significantly, this assertion made in the counter affidavit is not denied in the rejoinder of the petitioners. They have merely tried to explain the said allegation by offering certain justifications.The petitioners have not specifically denied that the first petitioner would get a sum of Rs.1,080/- crores by ensuring that each distributor maintains the minimum sales level.Even though the scheme per se does not stipulate that each distributor has to maintain the minimum required business level, prescription of minimum level of 50 PV to qualify for getting commission is sufficient inducement for the members to relentlessly strive for maintaining the PV level at or above the said minimum levels.(Para 33).

It is, thus, evident that the whole scheme is so ingeniously conceived that the inducement for aggressive enrollment of new members to earn more and more commission is inherent in the scheme.By holding out attractive commission on the business turned out by the downline members, the scheme provides for sufficient inducements for its members to chase for the new members in their hot pursuit to make quick/easy money.On the part of the promoter by pushing each member to achieve the minimum sales worth Rs.2,000/- per month, (this sale includes enrollment of new members) he is assured of about 1000 crores per annum.All this squarely satisfy the description of quick/easy money.In addition to this, it is an admitted fact that each person in order to continue to be the distributor, shall pay renewal subscription fee of Rs.995/- per annum.In para-11(b) of the counter affidavit on the admitted number of distributors of4,50,000 this amount is calculated at about Rs.45 crores per annum.These figures are not denied by the first petitioner in its rejoinder.The plea of the first petitioner that there is no compulsion that a member shall renew his distributorship looks to us to be specious.Once a person becomes a distributor in a scheme of this nature where the sops in the shape of commission are so luring, it would be very difficult for a member to withdraw from their membership to avoid payment of the annual renewal subscription fee. (Para 34).

From the whole analysis of the scheme and the way in which it is structured it is quite apparent that once a person gets into this scheme he will find it difficult to come out of the web and it becomes a vicious circle for him.In any event the petitioners have not specifically denied the turnover they are achieving and the income they are earning towards the initial enrollment of the distributors, the renewal subscription fee and the minimum sales being achieved by the distributors as alleged in the counter affidavit.By no means can it be said that the money which the first petitioner is earning is not the quick/easy money.By promising payment of commission on the business turned out by the down-line members sponsored either directly or indirectly by the up-line members (which constitutes an event or contingency relative to enrollment of members), the first petitioner is earning quick/easy money from its distributors, apart from ensuring its distributor earn quick/easy money.Thus the two ingredients are satisfied in the case of promoter too.We are, therefore, of the considered view that the scheme run by the petitioners squarely attracts the definition of “Money Circulation Scheme” as provided in Section 2(c) of the Act. (Para 35).

Friday, 19 November 2010

For the benefit of the new readers of our BLOG, the notice of the crime branch of Sikkim State Government, Indian Union, warning people about the imminent danger of joining money circulation schemes in general and Amway India in particular is reproduced.

It is notified for the information of the public in General that the Amway India Enterprises started their business operation in India in May, 1998. It deals with various consumer goods like tooth paste, soaps and other products like Nutralites etc. These products are camouflaged to cover up their money circulation schemes. This company is into the recruitment of members and the sale of products is only incidental to the main activity of recruitment and payment of commission. Through a promise of quick and easy money this company has succeeded in duping the gullible public in India. The activities of this company are akin to money circulation schemes, which in India are expressedly banned under the Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978.

In the year 2006, a case was registered against Amway and its distributors by CID/Andhra Pradesh on a specific complaint on 24/09/06 vide Crl. Case No. 10/2006 U/S 385/420 IPC and Section 4, 5 & 6 of the Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978.

The Division Bench of High Court of Andhra Pradesh vide order dated 19/07/2007, delivered a landmark and path breaking judgment holding that the scheme of Amway India Enterprises is nothing but money circulation scheme. Later, Amway challenged the High Court order through Special Leave Petition in the Apex Court of India, which was dismissed on 14/08/2007 by the Supreme Court.

As discovered by CID, E.O.W. (Economic Offences Wing) Andhra Pradesh, Amway India Enterprises is a founder member of Indian direct selling association (IDSA) which is an association of different companies having similar modus operandi purportedly multilevel marketing just as the Amway Scheme. All these companies viz. Avon Beauty Products, Tupperware, Modicare, Oriflame India etc. including Amway India Enterprises are carrying on the business thereby violating the provision of Section 2(C) of Prize Chits and Money Circulation Scheme (Banning) Act, 1978. This view was endorsed by the Apex Court in dismissing against Amway special leave petition.

Thus, the business being carried out and carried on by the above companies by misleading/misguiding the innocent people have appeared to be illegal in the eyes of the law of the land and hence adequate publicity is given to the public in General for their awareness.

Wednesday, 17 November 2010

In view of the billionaire 'Amway' bosses' recent, abject $155 millions surrender in the Pokorny RICO lawsuit, I thought that your free-thinking readers might be interested to re-examine how (almost 30 years ago), these sanctimonious thieves hid behind their Mafia-style labyrinth of corporate structures, and used now-familiar tactics, to dodge being held fully to account for their organized crimes.

On November 10, 1983, before Chief Justice Evans of the Supreme Court of Ontario, the 'Amway Corporation' and 'Amway of Canada Ltd.' pleaded guilty to charges of criminal fraud. They were ordered to pay a C$25 millions fine. Even though no individual appeared in the dock or was found guilty, the Canadian court upheld the government prosecutors's original accusation that by means of fake and ficticious invoices and price lists, and the creation of a dummy corporation, the chief officers of these 'Amway' companies had deliberately defrauded the Canadian people out of more than C$28 millions.On the same day, the bosses of the 'Amway' mob ran expensive advertisements in The Wall St. Journal, The Washington Post, The Detroit News and the Grand Rapids Press, and sent a letter to their adherents and employees, signed by Vice President and General Legal Counsel, Otto Stolz. This reality-inverting propaganda attempted to portray Jay Van Andel and Richard DeVos' humiliating defeat and abject C$25 millions surrender as a courageous victory:

'Dismissal of Canada's charges against Four Executives marks New Era.'

'Unfortunately, in this highly complex area of customs regulations in a foreign country, a combination of misunderstandings and poor advice resulted in decisions which caused the corporation these difficulties.'

'All charges against four Amway executives have been withdrawn as a part of the settlement of charges filed a year ago by Canadian authorities.'

'Amway's co-founders relied consistently upon the advice of various responsible corporate officers and legal counselors that the agreement existed and that the company was acting in full compliance with the law.'

'When questions about Canadian customs procedures arose, Amway's co-founders acted responsibly. My own experience [Otto Stolz's] in many different corporate setting convince me that Rich and Jay responded in a highly ethical manner consistent with sound business judgment and practice."

"They chose to make a tremendous personal and financial sacrifice in order to end the ordeal and eliminate this impediment to the future growth and potential of the business... They chose to make this sacrifice by settling now and thus preserving the Amway business opportunity for millions of individuals."

All these published statements are grotesque distortions of the truth; for, in reality, a series of rigorous investigations had originally culminated in criminal indictments against the bosses of the 'Amway' mob and two of their under-bosses. However, when the individual defendants failed to respond to the court's order that they must appear at hearings of their case, the Canadian authorities were forced to begin expensive extradition proceedings, but, even then, the defendants refused to be held to account. Instead, they were allowed to negotiate a cost-effective plea bargain. Rather than waste more tax-payers money, the prosecutor reluctantly agreed to drop the criminal indictments against Messrs. DeVos and Van Andel, provided that the corporate structures which they had used to commit criminal fraud immediately plead guilty to all the charges and paid the largest fine ever imposed in Canada. Self-evidently, a corporation is an artificial entity which cannot engage in criminal activity alone; such an entity can technically be held liable for the criminal conduct of its officers, and/or employees. Interestingly, the watered-down corporate guilty plea and the payment of the substantial fine did not halt these proceedings. A civil lawsuit, in which the Canadian government demanded C$148,000,000 in customs duties, taxes and penalties, led to the 'Amway' bosses finally being forced to hand back another chunk of their ill-gotten Canadian gains.

Judge Evans explicitly rejected the lie that Messrs. De Vos and Van Andel's non-payment of duties was due to misunderstandings and bad advice. Indeed, he said, that the pair's crimes were part of a deliberate policy 'designed to defeat the customs laws.' This policy entailed 'elaborate techniques of camouflage' that were, in his judgment, 'clearly designed to conceal and mislead... The submission (to the Canadian tax authorities) of hundreds of false invoices and dummy price lists, along with the establishment of a dummy corporation, were steps in a sophisticated fraud.'

The judge stated that he based the corporate conviction on a 'premeditated and deliberate course of conduct' that was 'further evidenced by the Amway executive's refusal to take the advice of their own auditors and customs brokers who had urged them to make a full disclosure of their schemes to the Canadian government.' Contrary to what the 'Amway' bosses steadfastly pretended to be reality, they actually rejected their auditors' wise advice to respect the law. These same auditors then resigned, choosing to give up their lucrative 'Amway' account rather than to participate in the ongoing conspiracy to commit, and shield, fraud, which they had discovered.

Near the end of the reality-inverting letter sent to Amway adherents and employees in 1983, was the following, deeply-ambiguous statement: 'With settlement achieved despite its enormous personal cost, Jay and Rich are committed to putting the issue behind us all... they insist that everyone in the organization learn from the important lessons this experience offers.'

Laughably, today, if you take a look at the twisted epistle which the billionaire bosses of the 'Amway' mob have again been obliged to send out to try to keep control of their useful idiots and rapidly-diminishing, unquestioning flock of victims (in which they again attempt to deny the factual evidence proving that they are racketeers, and which Mr. Steadson has tried to pass-off on this Blog as the truth), you will discover the same weasel words and phrases which appeared almost 30 years ago.

That said, given 50+ years of evidence, how is it possible that senior US federal law enforcement agents still haven't recognised the obvious pattern of ongoing, major racketeering activity which the billionaire bosses of the 'Amway' mob, and their propagandists, continue to deny?

Monday, 15 November 2010

We now have the unedifying spectacle on your Blog of Mr. David Steadson (an unmasked propagandist for a mob of billionaire, US-based, cultic/totalitarian racketeers) steadfastly pretending to be the brave little victim of delusional liars and cowards, and issuing indignant challenges to cite examples of where and when he has told lies.

Self-evidently, Mr. Steadson is a criminal who has spent years of his life patrolling the Net. hiding behind various puerile masks. During this period (apparently in return for no material reward) he has constantly endeavoured to maintain his abusive de facto bosses' absolute monopoly of information (and to isolate them from criminal liability) by systematicallyblaming their victims whilst systematically categorizing, condemning and excluding as 'negative', 'dishonest' , 'deluded', 'unenlightened', etc., all free-thinking individuals and any quantifiable evidence which challenges the authenticity of the absurd, but nonetheless pernicious, '100% positive,'cultic/totalitarian, controlling-fiction entitled the 'Amway Business Opportunity.'

In pursuing this highly-organized, closed-logic, propaganda activity on behalf of racketeers, and over such a long period of time, Mr. Steadson (if he really is just one individual) has self-evidently not been acting wholly-independently. The evidence strongly-indicates that he has been a knowing-participant in a conspiracy to commit fraud and to obstruct justice. Indeed, he has recently made the mistake of posting reality-inverting propaganda on the Net. concerning his de facto bosses' abject surrender in a class-action civil lawsuit, filed in California in 2007 by a large group of American 'Amway' victims, which accused various 'Amway' bosses and under-bosses of perpetrating, and hiding, decades of criminal offences constituting an obvious pattern of ongoing, major racketeering activity (as defined by the US federal Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organizations Act).

In order to prevent this well-informed, private prosecution from going to trial, Mr. Steadson's de facto bosses first tried to invoke a typically-abusive clause in their victims' abusive'Amway' contracts which apparently took away their rights as the citizens of a democracy to sue and, instead, obliged them to enter into a Mafia-style, internal system of dispute resolution, but which laughably required the destitute contractees to make impossibly-expensive advance-payments of several thousands of dollars to 'Amway' before they could even get an unfair hearing. Not surprisingly, a federal judge ruled that this Orwellian clause was a 'stacked deck inAmway's favour' which could not be invoked in the real world, and ordered the trial to go ahead. At this point, 'Amway's'attorneys realized that the game was up, so they entered into negotiations with the plaintiffs' attorneys in which they agreed to a settlement which will return $55 millions to the victims and cost the 'Amway' organization a total of $155 millions, but which will allow the 'Amway' bosses to avoid going to trial under RICO or admitting any wrongdoing.

In plain language, the American kleptocracy has buried its head in the sand whilst the abusive billionaire bosses of a home-grown, major organized crime group have entered into a sleazy treaty with the American legal representatives of a relatively-small percentage of US 'Amway' victims, whereby these racketeers can pay back a insignificant fraction of what they have previously stolen from millions of abused American citizens over a period of more than 50 years, in order that they can dodge being held fully to account for their crimes and continue to steal from, and abuse, tens of millions of the citizens of other countries. To date, federal law enforement agents are nowhere to be seen.

However, in truth, each time the unmasked 'Amway' Lord Haw Haw, Mr. 'IBOFB' Steadson, makes another of his endless, reality-inverting appearances on the Net, he is pushing his de facto bosses closer to a prison cell.

Sunday, 14 November 2010

Typically of an inflexible cult apologist, Mr. Steadson is still trying to post his de facto bosses' reality-inverting propaganda on your Blog in which he insists that he alone represents the truth. The poor little lad asksus (in all innocence) to explain exactly where and when he has lied ? The short answer to his inane question is: every time he appeared on the Net in the reality-inverting guise of an 'Independent Amway Business Owner.'

In more specific terms, it is a true and accurate statement to say that Mr. David Steadson is a criminal propagandist for billionaire racketeers; for, without any supporting evidence, he has recently pretended that the Pokorny RICO lawsuit was groundless, and that it would have easily been dismissed had it gone to trial, but that 'Amway's'owners' attorneys persuaded their innocent clients that it would be cheaper and quicker to pay off the plaintiffs.

Self-evidently the unmasked 'Amway' Lord Haw Haw has libelled me by falsely accusing me of lying. However, he has also (indirectly) falsely accused Robert FitzPatrick of committing perjury in his declaration in support of the plaintiffs in the Pokorny RICO lawsuit.

Saturday, 13 November 2010

As you know, pernicious cults employ co-ordinated devious techniques of social and psychological persuasion (variously described as: ‘covert hypnosis’, ‘mental manipulation’, ‘coercive behaviour modification’, ‘group pressure’, ‘thought reform’, ‘ego destruction’, ‘mind control’, ‘brainwashing’, ‘neuro-linguistic programming’, ‘love bombing’, etc.). These techniques are designed to fulfil the hidden criminal objectives of the leaders by provoking in the adherents an infantile total dependence on the group to the detriment of themselves and of their existing family, and/or other, relationships. Pernicious cults manipulate their adherents’ existing beliefs and instinctual desires, creating the illusion that they are exercising free will. In this way, adherents can also be surreptitiously coerced into following potentially harmful, physical procedures (sleep deprivation, protein restriction, repetitive chanting/ moving, etc.) which are similarly designed to facilitate the shutting down of an individual’s critical and evaluative faculties without his/her fully-informed consent.

I'm sure that if a gang of Bible-thumping, American charlatan-preachers were circulating in your homeland peddling future (spiritual) redemption in Heaven, they would find very few takers. However, they might have more success if they tailored their story to fit the spirit of the times, and peddled the desperate, and/or greedy, future (economic) redemption on Earth.

In the Bible, a story is told of how (2000 years ago) Jesus fed a crowd of 5000 hungry believers with only enough food for a family picnic (and produced a massive surplus). This is self-evidently a physical impossibility, but, today, fundamentalist Christians still accept without question that the event really happened and that Jesus exists and has superhuman powers.Although many free-thinking people (including myself) consider the Bible to be a mixture of fact and fiction presented as total fact, they respect the irrational beliefs of all traditional religious groups, provided they also respect the law. The point being that, in the Biblical story, Jesus is not a charlatan on the make. On the contrary, he is a perfect role-model who refuses the temptation of the Devil to use his superhuman powers to become temporarily rich and powerful on Earth, and who chooses to remain poverty-stricken himself (and finally be brutally tortured and executed as a charlatan) in order to preserve future (spiritual) redemption for his followers in Heaven.

Consequently, all Jesus asks for in return for transforming a finite quantity of food into an infinite quantity, is total belief in future (spiritual) redemption in Heaven. He doesn't keep searching for fresh hungry followers to hand over 10 shekels each to enter the Miracle Buffet and, thus, keep pocketing 50, 000 shekels.

Amazingly, this perverted plagiarism of an otherwise-harmless Biblical story is essentially what the billionaire bosses of the 'Amway' mob, and their many copy-cats, have been peddling as total fact for 50+ years all over the world. Quite obviously, these Bible-thumping American charlatans do not possess superhuman powers to turn a finite quantity of money into an infinite quantity, but when their victims have inevitably failed to get fed (economically) and complained, they have been shown the door and told that (economic) starvation was all their own fault, because they didn't believe totally in future (economic) redemption on Earth.

It is a true and accurate statement to say that Mr. David Steadson, is a proven liar and de facto agent of racketeers, who would risk a substantial fine and jail sentence if he made the same false claims on their behalf to a court, as he has recently posted on the Net (where he is under no threat of a perjury charge). For, contrary to what the unmasked 'Amway' Lord Haw Haw would have the world believe, all that the billionaire bosses of the 'Amway' mob had to do to halt the Pokorny RICO lawsuit and, thus, establish once and for all that they really are innocent businessmen rather than abusive racketeers pretending to be innocent businessmen, was prove that Robert FitzPatrick's declaration in support of the plaintiffs (with which we are in agreement), was false. Furthermore, had the billionaire bosses of the 'Amway' mob been able to succeed in this simple task, then Robert would have been exposed once and for all as a liar, given a substantial fine and sent to prison for perjury. Perhaps Mr. Steadson will now endeavour to explain to your readers why his de facto bosses didn't call on him to make a cost-effective, counter-declaration to the court (under threat of a perjury charge) in their support. http://www.casewatch.org/civil/amway/fitzpatrick.pdf . Apparently, he does everything for 'Amway' free of charge.

In the adult world of quantifiable reality, the billionaire bosses of the 'Amway' mob failed and the Pokorny RICO suit was scheduled to go to trial. No matter how much of their ill-gotten gains were thrown at the problem, their own attorneys could not produce one shred of quantifiable evidence to prove that Robert FitzPatrick's declaration was false. Indeed, they were faced with a mountain of quantifiable evidence proving that it contained the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. This is why these abusive racketeers were obliged to run up a white flag and agree to surrender $155 millions of their ill-gotten gains. In the end, their only objective was to avoid going to trial, because they knew that it was a certainty that they would be convicted (albeit in a civil court) of a running a vast closed-market swindle and related advance fee fraud - the constituent parts of a pattern of ongoing major racketeering activity which began more than 50 years ago. Had the bosses of the 'Amway' mob been convicted in the Pokorny RICO suit, then their chances of dodging a federal RICO prosecution, bankruptcy and long prison terms would have been pretty slim.

The current situation, produced by the announcement of 'Amway's' bosses' abject surrender in the Pokorny v. 'Amway' lawsuit, has placed the 'Amway' Ministry of Truth in an unenviable position. The latest absurd (damage limitation) propaganda which steadfastly pretends that 'Amway's' attorneys could have easily won the groundless Pokorny RICO suit had it gone to trial, but that it was cheaper and quicker to pay-off the plaintiffs, is obviously targetted at less-than intellectually-rigorous observers and the unquestioning 'Amway' faithful.

After all, only narcissistic, totalitarian racketeers would try to peddle a humiliating defeat (to their useful idiots and destitute, and starving, co-narcissistic followers) as a 'courageous victory.'

However, his provocative false accusation that I have lied, centres on his own intellectually-castrated misinterpretation of my unambiguous phrase:

'When faced with intellectually-rigorous opponents who understand exactly how pernicious, blame-the-victim closed-market swindles have been dissimulated (for more than 50 years) as 'MLM Business Opportunities,' the sanctimonious racketeers who run them, and their arrogant propagandists, have nothing substantial to say.'

The tedious Mr. Steadson maliciously takes the English adjective 'substantial' only in its wider meaning, 'of large size or amount'. Unfortunately for Mr. Steadson, to free-thinking readers, the adjective 'substantial,' also means 'of real importance or value.' In the context of my statement, only the inflexible propagandist of racketeers could deliberately misconstrue what was meant in order falsely to accuse me of lying.

Self-evidently, the 'Amway' racketeers have spent more than 50 years constructing and maintaining a mystifying lie of a substantial size. However, theglobal 'MLM' lie has no real importance or value to the tens of millions of ill-informed victims who have bought into it. That said, the racketeers who have illegally earned billions of dollars from peddling this substantial lie, have now proved their guilt by agreeing to hand over $155 millions of their ill-gotten gains to stop an otherwise unstoppable private prosecution. This is the very latest, blatant, criminal attempt to escape from being held fully to account, and which forms part of a lengthy pattern of major racketeering activity.

In view of these important wider issues, suing Mr. Steadson over the exact meaning of the English adjective, 'substantial', would make as much sense as suing an organ-grinder's dancing monkey for shitting in public.

Thieves always come out with excuses, excuses and more excuses. When criminal cases were filed all over country against Amway India, immediately, the company announced that it is going to revise the entry fee and changed its business model. They told the same to the police officers who went to their offices at Hyderabad investigating the case following the criminal case filed by Corporate Frauds Watch. But the business model of 6-4-3 is still there and that is nothing but pyramid scheme.

If it is a proved good business opportunity why run helter skelter while facing criminal cases. They know well that they are cheating people. As long as the cheating is possible, they continue the cheating. They even tried to hoodwink the Andhra Pradesh High Court describing their business model. But the Andhra Pradesh High Court ripped open the veil and showed the world that it is easy and quick money the Amway India is pocketing through their business model.

Once the veil is blown out, they claim that they had changed their business format and charging less than earlier. If they are charging Rs1800 earlier, now they are charging only Rs. 995 which is also easy and quick money for the Amway India. So is the case of renewal of membership.

People have realised that what Amway is doing actually cheating. That is why there are no new recruits in India. The website of Amway India mentions the old number of IBOs at 4.5 lakh from 2007. It is doubtful whether all these 4.5 lakh are still with Amway India.

The issue of settlement is also the same that of Andhra Pradesh High Court experience. They know for sure that they are going to lose if the trial reaches its logical end. That is why they are offering to pay a paltry amount of $ 15.5 million to the former IBOs while they pocketed several billions all these years.

The thief is caught in the act. He confessed that he has been stealing from people at large. However, he demands not to be punished. How could the court allow an out of court of settlement for theft. Still, he appeals to the court for an out of court settlement promising he would mend his ways.

The arrogant apologists continue to argue, albeit lamely, that the culprit wishes to pay some amount to the victims as if it is a great thing.

Don't they realise that Amway is admitting its guilt by agreeing to pay its victims. Don't they understand that the Amway business model is nothing but a pyramid scheme and outright cheating. They know well that Amway has indulged in stealing all these years. They steadfastly defended its business model. They also pretended that everything is fine with Amway though they and their friends and relatives have already lost a substantial amount in the Amway racket.

If it is in India, the Corporate Frauds Watch would have filed an implead petition in the criminal case under the new provisions of CrPC and contested for imprisonment for the past deeds of Amway.

We, people of India, appeal to the American judiciary not to allow the thief go scotfree. Under the Prize Chits & Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978, the act is punishable with three years imprisonment and fine.

Monday, 8 November 2010

The recent capitulation of the billionaire bosses of the 'Amway' mob in the Pokorny v. 'Quixtar' ('Amway') lawsuit, tells us nothing that we did not know already.

When faced with intellectually-rigorous opponents who understand exactly how pernicious, blame-the-victim closed-market swindles have been dissimulated (for more than 50 years) as 'MLM Business Opportunities,' the sanctimonious racketeers who run them, and their arrogant propagandists, have nothing substantial to say.

What now amazes me, are the various, previously-critical observers who have immediately put forward the rather naive suggestion that the settlement of the Pokorny v. 'Amway' lawsuit will lead to the complete reformation of the 'Amway' organization.

I would remind these well-intentioned persons that, in the 1970s, the billionaire bosses of the 'Amway' mob were caught red-handed (by agents of the Federal Trade Commission) running exactly the same, pernicious, blame-the-victim closed-market swindle (albeit on a much smaller scale). At that time, they escaped criminal prosecution, and the closure of their fake 'direct selling' company, in the USA, by steadfastly pretending to a federal judge that, henceforth, their illegal activities would be completely reformed. The various, much-lauded 'changes' to the conduct ofthe 'Amway' organization, which were supposed to have been 'voluntarily introduced,'are now proved to have been a pack of lies. Indeed, had agents of the US federal government comprehended the full-horror of the organized crime group which they had actually uncovered in the 1970s, these reality-inverting 'MLM' racketeers would probaly still be in prison today and their many copy-cats would not exist.

In reality, the $155 millions which it is apparently going to cost the grinning bosses of the 'Amway' mob to halt the Pokorny lawsuit, is the eqivalent of giving a $150 speeding ticket to the psychopathic, billionaire owner/passengers of a fleet of armoured-cars whose chauffeurs have just been caught (again) mowing down crowds of poor pedestrians, and then sending them all on their way confident that they will keep their (habitual) fake promise never to re-offend.

Beware Indians! The infamous copycat of Amway India and the member of Indian Direct Selling (Swindling! due apologies to David Brear) Association, Mary Kay is planning massive expansion to cheat Indian public in over 200 cities across the country. I have already posted about its modus operandi in cheating the public by enrollment.

Mary Kay India told an unsuspecting journalist of Indian Express that Mary Kay is planning to recruit one hundred thousand Independent Beauty Consultants all over country. If Amway has IBOs, Mary Kay has IBCs with a letter difference.

The US-based company sells skin care, makeup, and body care and fragrance products. If anybody wants to become `an independent beauty consultant,’ one has to be sponsored by a member i.e. ENROLLMENT. The company also offers a ‘dream business opportunity’ with rewards like diamond bracelet and foreign trips and even luxury cars on achieving sales targets i.e. enrollment targets. It has three offices in India. However it is limited so far to only Metros in the country. Mainly it targets high society women in the higher income group.

Now the cosmetic company is mostly targeting working women who have more dispensable income and are ready to experiment in order to look groomed and younger. One could understand how this company is scheming to bring women in their dragnet. All its products are high-priced and the modus operandi is same that of Amway India.

It is high time, Indians in general and women in particular keep a watch on the dubious activities of such companies and keep them off. If anybody approaches you to become a member and enroll more members, and it is a good business opportunity to earn easy and quick money, just inform the police as it is a crime under the provisions of Prize Chits And Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978.

Saturday, 6 November 2010

As you know, in 2007, a class action civil lawsuit was filed against 'Amway' in California, under the federal Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organizations Act. Three directors and advisors of Pyramid Scheme Alert (including Robert Fitzpatrick) served as experts and consultants to the victims in this case. At first, 'Amway's' attorneys delayed proceedings (and incurred huge additional costs for the plaintiffs) by steadfastly pretending that the plaintiffs had no right to sue, because as the signatories of 'Amway' contracts, they had voluntarily accepted a 'binding (internal) arbitration agreement.' However, a Federal court ruled that the arbitration process was unenforceable and unfair. The judge said of 'Amway's' own parallel system of dispute resolution , 'the requirement …is substantively unconscionable, and exceedingly so,' and graphically described the contracts as a 'stacked deck' in'Amway's' favour.

The suit (which was filed by the firm of Boies, Schiller & Flexner) was finally allowed to proceed. It charged that 'Amway' deliberately misled consumers with false income claims, sold them overpriced products and marketing materials, and secretly transferred the lost investments of virtually all new recruits to a tiny few at the top, year after year. The suit accused 'Amway' of operating an illegal pyramid scheme and it argued that 'Amway's' main revenue source is ultimately its own so-called 'sales force,' since the company has little retail sales and few retail customers. Thus, 'Amway's' real product is a fake 'business opportunity' generating huge illegal profits through the recruitment of ill-informed consumers to invest in a reality-inverting swindle promoted as a viable 'business opportunity.' The suit clearly explained that the overwhelming majority of 'Amway' recruits do not not make sales to the general public in an open market. Therefore, 'Amway' operates as a closed-market, dooming, by its 'endless chain' design, virtually all who join at the bottom, year after year.

This week it has been announced that 'Amway's' attorneys have halted the suit by agreeing to pay victims and cover litigation costs amounting to over $55 million in cash and goods. A judicially administered fund will pay refunds to two classes of victims, those who joined 'Amway' and quit within a year (usually paying only initial fees) and another group of those who stayed in longer (and lost much more). Another $50 million will be paid in other costs incurred by 'Amway' to meet the terms of the settlement. Under terms of the settlement, 'Amway' will also stop advertizing misleading income claims. In total, halting the suit will cost the billionaire bosses of the 'Amway' mob just $155 millions http://www.bsfllp.com/news/in_the_news/000144

In the usual terms of class action settlements, the billionaire bosses of the 'Amway' mob have admitted no guilt. Laughably, however, they have volunteered to pay back a fraction of what they have stolen, lower the fixed-prices of their effectively-unsaleable wampum and increase the 'refund period' on it, pay all the victims' court costs and give them free wampum.'Significant changes' are also to be made in the so-called 'tools business.'

To date, US federal law enforcement agents are nowhere to be seen, the reality-inverting 'Amway' propaganda machine is already in full swing and it's crooked business as usual for the self-appointed rulers of the American kleptocracy, but what conclusions are the Indian authorities going to draw from Pokorny v. 'Quixtar' ('Amway')?

Indeed, in the light of this (and other) evidence, what possible justification could any democratic government put forward for allowing this gang of US-based racketeers, and their many copy-cats, to continue to steal from the public ?

Thursday, 4 November 2010

As you and your free-thinking readers are aware, when you tell a big enough lie and keep repeating it, eventually people will accept it as the truth.

How many times have we heard on your Blog (without the slightest qualification) the scripted-bleating of the reality-denying, insolvent and economically-illiterate, 'Amway' faithful that the 'Amway Corporation' has 'expanding, annual sales figures of $8.4 billion' and an 'expanding sales force of 3 million Independent Business Owners, worldwide?' Sadly, countlesss useful idiots (including: judges, politicians, journalists, co-opted academics, celebrities, etc.) have also repeated these comic-book lies (without the slightest qualification).

For a long time, the so-called 'annual sales figures' of the 'Amway' organization actually comprised the total amount of effectively-unsaleable, over-priced wampum which had been 'wholesaled' (i.e. peddled) to 'Amway's' constantly-churning, so-called 'sales-force' in a 12 month period, plus the addition of 30%, which (in theory) was the so-called 'sales force's' lawful profit derived from its members regularly selling the majority of their 'Amway' wampum to outsiders, at the organization's'recommended retail price.' However, despite the 'Amway' organization's own comic-book 'rules' (which have appeared to make it obligatory for the members of 'Amway's' so-called 'sales force' to have retailed a significant amount of wampum for a profit before they could receive commission payments), in reality, no means has ever existed for the 'Amway' organization to verify that any member of its so-called 'sales force' has actually made regular, profitable retail sales to outsiders. 'Amway's' own comic-book 'rules' have not been enforced, for they couldn't be enforced and, furthermore, they were never intended to be enforced. We now know that, in reality (for 50+ years), the overwhelming majority of the constantly-churning, insolvent 'Amway' flock, hasn't even made one profitable retail transaction, and that the billionaire bosses of the organization have been fully-aware of this unviable closed-market, because they maliciously created it.

In simple terms, for decades, the stability, profitablity and scale of financial activity within the 'Amway' organization was deliberately exaggerated by a huge factor in order to perpetrate, and shield, one of the most-extensive swindles in history. Over this period, many billions of dollars of so-called 'Amway annual sales' never actually existed; whilst the billions of dollars of so-called 'sales' which actually took place were mostly only dissimulated payments within an illegal, endless-chain, money circulation scheme. The abusive 'Amway' bosses might as well have been peddling their victims bottles of coloured-water for the price of fine wine and then pretending that it was an exclusive, good-value product which could be easily sold for a profit, whilst simultaneously blaming their victims for not being able to sell it for a profit.

Laughably, 'Amway' apologists now claim that, since 1999, the so-called 'annual sales figures' of the 'Amway' organization have no longer included the additional (imaginary) 30% retail profit margin.

Once you know exactly how the 'Amway/MLM' swindle works, it beggars belief that senior law enforcement agents in the USA (and elsewhere) have found themselves unable look past all the mystifying bullshit and to explain what has actually been occurring to criminal prosecutors in accurate deconstructed terms. With just a little bit of thought, the bosses of the 'Amway' mob could have been recognized as absurd charlatans decades ago; their illegal profits could have been seized (before these totalled billions of dollars) and they could have been packed off to prison (before they spawned all their copy-cats).